The Agenda

The Intra-Conservative Minimum Wage Debate

Robert Costa and Karen Tumulty report on the growing number of Republicans who favor an increase in the federal hourly minimum wage. Several former Republican presidential candidates, including Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, and Mitt Romney, have endorsed a minimum wage hike, as have a number of current GOP candidates for the House and Senate. As a general rule, these Republicans don’t offer substantive arguments for raising the federal minimum wage, and let’s be clear that state governments are free, as they’ve been for some time, to set state minimum wages that exceed the federal minimum wage. Rather, they focus on appearances, as when Pawlenty, president and CEO of the Financial Services Roundtable, an organization that lobbies on behalf of the financial services industry, frets that the GOP often looks like “the party of Scrooge.” I appreciate Pawlenty’s concern. And I actually do think that there is a political case for Republicans to accept a modest minimum wage increase and indexing the minimum wage to inflation, even though there is good reason to believe that a higher minimum wage would reduce net job growth.

But let’s be clear as to why there is a case for conservatives to get behind some compromise position on this issue. It is not because a higher minimum wage is the best, least harmful way to raise market incomes or employment levels, because it’s not. What we need are tighter labor markets, and to get there we need a combination of more aggressive monetary policy, housing and tax policy reform, and an immigration policy designed to increase demand for less- and mid-skilled workers currently residing in the U.S. If anything, we ought to consider lowering the federal minimum wage, or at least lowering it for the long-term unemployed and young workers, while modernizing (and expanding) federal wage subsidies, as Michael R. Strain of AEI has argued. By making work more accessible and more attractive, Strain’s approach will raise employment levels among less-skilled workers. Yet it might also depress market wages, at least in the short term, which is why increasing wage subsidies is crucial. Better monetary policy and structural reform are the best way create an environment conducive to productivity growth and wage growth, though this process will take some time. In an ideal world, these would be the labor market strategies the right would pursue. The political challenge is that Strain’s jobs agenda requires some increase in spending, and spending increases are anathema to most conservative lawmakers, even if Strain’s spending increases actually yield savings over time by encouraging skill accumulation (it’s much easier to gain skills when you’re working), which will in turn reduce anti-poverty spending (because only those who make it on the first rungs of the jobs ladder will be able to climb it, and to become economically self-reliant). 

The irony is that the conservatives who might be amenable to something like Strain’s approach — let’s not risk excluding workers from the formal labor market by raising the statutory minimum wage, but let’s spend intelligently to get people back to work — are the ones who are embracing a minimum wage increase as (essentially) a proxy for some better mix of policies, or as a way of signaling that they care about the well-being of American workers and that they’re willing to use the power of government to improve their well-being. And most of the conservatives opposed to a minimum wage increase are also disinclined toward active labor market policies of the kind Strain has in mind, including an expansion of federal wage subsidies, on the grounds that such policies represent big government overreach, or that they involve spending money we don’t have. It’s no wonder that low- and middle-income voters are skeptical as to whether conservatives are doing enough to defend their interests. The real case for a minimum wage compromise is not that it’s good policy. Rather, it’s that conservatives in Congress and in the states have done such a poor job of offering alternatives. That has to change.

Reihan Salam is president of the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor of National Review.

Most Popular

Val Demings vs. Susan Rice

The website PredictIt now shows California senator Kamala Harris as the clear frontrunner in the Biden veepstakes, with close to a 50 percent chance of getting the nod. The second most likely Biden VP, according to the site, is Florida congresswoman Val Demings -- who is at 14 percent -- and in third place is ... Read More

Val Demings vs. Susan Rice

The website PredictIt now shows California senator Kamala Harris as the clear frontrunner in the Biden veepstakes, with close to a 50 percent chance of getting the nod. The second most likely Biden VP, according to the site, is Florida congresswoman Val Demings -- who is at 14 percent -- and in third place is ... Read More

The Year of Stupid

It turned out that the novel coronavirus was only the second-most-infectious disease to spread through the U.S. this year. Satan’s Cupcake has, after all, been diagnosed in less than 1 percent of Americans. The not-so-novel imbecility virus is, on the other hand, ravaging the minds of everyone from news ... Read More

The Year of Stupid

It turned out that the novel coronavirus was only the second-most-infectious disease to spread through the U.S. this year. Satan’s Cupcake has, after all, been diagnosed in less than 1 percent of Americans. The not-so-novel imbecility virus is, on the other hand, ravaging the minds of everyone from news ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Good Riddance to the Blaine Amendments

It took a century and a half, but the Supreme Court finally rejected the Blaine amendments. The Court’s decision in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue is a victory for religious believers, schoolchildren, poor and working-class parents, and the rule of law. It is a loss only for bigots, militant ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Good Riddance to the Blaine Amendments

It took a century and a half, but the Supreme Court finally rejected the Blaine amendments. The Court’s decision in Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue is a victory for religious believers, schoolchildren, poor and working-class parents, and the rule of law. It is a loss only for bigots, militant ... Read More
U.S.

Individual Actions Matter

On the menu today: an update from a reader who is the head of research for a top-ten U.S. hospital, some really intriguing rumors about retirements at the U.S. Supreme Court, and another batch of stories that don’t fit the preferred “coronavirus is devastating the red states!” narrative. Individual ... Read More
U.S.

Individual Actions Matter

On the menu today: an update from a reader who is the head of research for a top-ten U.S. hospital, some really intriguing rumors about retirements at the U.S. Supreme Court, and another batch of stories that don’t fit the preferred “coronavirus is devastating the red states!” narrative. Individual ... Read More

What Are Schools For?

In his excellent new book, Charter Schools and Their Enemies (full review forthcoming in National Review) Thomas Sowell advises that it is necessary for us to remind ourselves from time to time of a first truth: “Schools exist for the education of children.” Sometimes, the most obvious truths prove to be ... Read More

What Are Schools For?

In his excellent new book, Charter Schools and Their Enemies (full review forthcoming in National Review) Thomas Sowell advises that it is necessary for us to remind ourselves from time to time of a first truth: “Schools exist for the education of children.” Sometimes, the most obvious truths prove to be ... Read More